Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of three formulations for eddy-current problems in a spiral coil electromagnetic acoustic transducer

  • Mechanical Engineering, Control Science and Information Engineering
  • Published:
Journal of Central South University Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three differential equations based on different definitions of current density are compared. Formulation I is based on an incomplete equation for total current density (TCD). Formulations II and III are based on incomplete and complete equations for source current density (SCD), respectively. Using the weak form of finite element method (FEM), three formulations were applied in a spiral coil electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) example to solve magnetic vector potential (MVP). The input impedances calculated by Formulation III are in excellent agreement with the experimental measurements. Results show that the errors for Formulations I & II vary with coil diameter, coil spacing, lift-off distance and external excitation frequency, for the existence of eddy-current and skin & proximity effects. And the current distribution across the coil conductor also follows the same trend. It is better to choose Formulation I instead of Formulation III to solve MVP when the coil diameter is less than twice the skin depth for Formulation I is a low cost and high efficiency calculation method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. HERNANDEZ-VALLE F, DIXON S. Initial tests for designing a high temperature EMAT with pulsed electromagnet [J]. NDT & E International 2010, 43(2): 171–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. PETCHER P A, POTTER M D G, DIXON S. A new electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) design for operation on rail [J]. NDT & E International 2014, 65: 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. JIAN X, DIXON S, EDWARDS R, QUIRK K, BAILLIE I. Effect on ultrasonic generation of a backplate in electromagnetic acoustic transducers [J]. Journal of Applied Physics 2007, 102(2): 249091–249096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. HAO Kuan-sheng, HUANG Song-hing, ZHAO Wei, DUAN Ru-jiao, WANG Shen. Modeling and finite element analysis of transduction process of electromagnetic acoustic transducers for nonferromagnetic metal material testing [J]. Journal of Central South University of Technology 2011, 18: 749–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. HIRAO M, OGI H. EMATs for science and industry: Noncontacting ultrasonic measurements [M]. New York: Springer, 2003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. ZHAI Guo-fu, WANG Kai-can, WANG Ya-kun, KANG Lei. Modeling of Lorentz forces and radiated wave fields for bulk wave electromagnetic acoustic transducers [J]. Journal of Applied Physics 2013, 114(5): 549011–549019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. KANG L, DIXON S, WANG K C, DAI J M. Enhancement of signal amplitude of surface wave EMATs based on 3-D simulation analysis and orthogonal test method [J]. NDT & E International 2013, 59: 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. DING X, WU X, WANG Y. Bolt axial stress measurement based on a mode-converted ultrasound method using an electromagnetic acoustic transducer [J]. Ultrasonics 2014, 54(3): 914–920.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. TU J, KANG Y, LIU Y. A new magnetic configuration for a fast electromagnetic acoustic transducer applied to online steel pipe wall thickness measurements [J]. Materials Evaluation 2014, 72(11): 1407–1413.

    Google Scholar 

  10. RIBICHINI R, CEGLA F, NAGY P B, CAWLEY P. Quantitative modeling of the transduction of electromagnetic acoustic transducers operating on ferromagnetic media [J]. Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, IEEE Transactions on 2010, 57(12): 2808–2817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. HAO K, HUANG S, ZHAO W, WANG S, DONG J R. Analytical modelling and calculation of pulsed magnetic field and input impedance for EMATs with planar spiral coils [J]. NDT & E International 2011, 44(3): 274–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. JIAN X, DIXON S, GRAT TAN K, EDWARDS R S. A model for pulsed Rayleigh wave and optimal EMAT design [J]. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2006, 128(2): 296–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. KONRAD A. Integrodifferential finite element formulation of two-dimensional steady-state skin effect problems [J]. Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on 1982, 18(1): 284–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. JAFARI-SHAPOORABADI R, KONRAD A, SINCLAIR A N. Improved finite element method for EMAT analysis and design [J]. Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on 2001, 37(4): 2821–2823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. JAFARI-SHAPOORABADI R, KONRAD A, SINCLAIR A N. Comparison of three formulations for eddy-current and skin effect problems [J]. Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on 2002, 38(2): 617–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. JAFARI SHAPOORABADI R. Electromagnetic acoustic transducer analysis by the finite element method [D]. Toronto: University of Toronto (Canada), 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. HAO Kuan-Sheng, HUANG Song-Ling, ZHAO Wei, WANG Shen. Circuit-field coupled finite element analysis method for an electromagnetic acoustic transducer under pulsed voltage excitation [J]. Chinese Physics B 2011, 20(6): 681041–681048.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of High Performance Complex Manufacturing, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, China

    Wen-ze Shi  (石文泽), Yun-xin Wu  (吴运新), Hai Gong  (龚海), Zhi-ran Zhao  (赵志然), Ji-zhi Fan  (范吉志) & Liang-chen Tan  (谭良辰)

  2. School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, China

    Wen-ze Shi  (石文泽), Yun-xin Wu  (吴运新), Hai Gong  (龚海), Zhi-ran Zhao  (赵志然) & Liang-chen Tan  (谭良辰)

  3. Nonferrous Metal Oriented Advanced Structural Materials and Manufacturing Cooperative Innovation Center, Changsha, 410083, China

    Yun-xin Wu  (吴运新), Hai Gong  (龚海) & Ji-zhi Fan  (范吉志)

  4. School of Materials Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, China

    Hai Gong  (龚海)

Authors
  1. Wen-ze Shi  (石文泽)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun-xin Wu  (吴运新)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hai Gong  (龚海)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhi-ran Zhao  (赵志然)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ji-zhi Fan  (范吉志)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Liang-chen Tan  (谭良辰)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hai Gong  (龚海).

Additional information

Foundation item: Project(2014BAF12B01) supported by the Key Projects in the National Science & Technology Pillar Program during the Twelfth Five-year Plan Period, China; Project(51405520) supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China; Project(2012CB619505) supported by National Basic Research Program of China

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shi, Wz., Wu, Yx., Gong, H. et al. Comparison of three formulations for eddy-current problems in a spiral coil electromagnetic acoustic transducer. J. Cent. South Univ. 23, 817–824 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-016-3128-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-016-3128-7

Key words

Search

Navigation